On July 2, 1996, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for one year with prison labor for night intrusion larceny at the Changwon District Court on May 10, 200; one year from imprisonment with prison labor for larceny; ten months from September 20, 2001; eight months from imprisonment with prison labor for night intrusion larceny at the Changwon District Court on February 11, 2003; one year from imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny; one year from the same court on September 19, 2006 at the same court on October 8, 2008; and one year from imprisonment with prison labor for habitual intrusion larceny at night at the Busan District Court on January 13, 201; and one year from the execution of the detention house at Busan on November 1, 2016.

On October 14, 2018, at around 04:55, the Defendant: (a) laid a studio on an emergency bridge installed on the outer wall with the idea of theft of property from the studio building located in Busan, which was located in B; and (b) went through a window in the residence of the second floor victim C of the building in question, the Defendant was not aware of the string of the windows, and did not commit an attempted crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Each photograph;

1. Previous conviction: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries about criminal history and investigation reports (the attachment of judgment and the current status of personal confinement);

1. Article 5-4 (5) 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 342 and 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime committed;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for the punishment of attempted mitigation is as follows: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime and misunderstandings; and (b) the commission of the crime did not actually cause economic damage due to the attempted crime; and (c) the circumstances are recognized.

The defendant has served several times as a criminal of the same larceny, and even though he/she has served as a criminal of the same larceny, he/she is again punished during the period of repeated crime.